On Sun, Apr 13, 2014 at 4:17 PM, Craig Weinberg <[email protected]>wrote:
> > > On Sunday, April 13, 2014 9:32:19 AM UTC-4, Platonist Guitar Cowboy wrote: > >> >> >> >> On Sun, Apr 13, 2014 at 12:46 AM, Craig Weinberg <[email protected]>wrote: >> >> >> >> On Saturday, April 12, 2014 2:24:03 PM UTC-4, Bruno Marchal wrote: >> >> >> >> We know that we cannot make our legs stand by arguing with them or >> proving that standing can occur, we must exercise direct sensory-motive >> participation and move our legs by ourselves. >> >> >> and >> just assume this if you want, but your phenomenology does not need >> this. Comp mighty be false, but you need far better argument, >> >> >> You demand that the subtlest, most delicate truth in the universe kneel >> down to the vending machine of comp and bash it open with a brick. That's >> not the way that it works. The machine gets nothing from me. Not a single >> coin. I know that it has nothing without our patronage, and gives nothing >> back but its own mindless rules, empty images, plastic music, and rude >> interventions. >> >> >> and for >> this much more humility and study the worlds of many others and the >> training in "scientific" argumentation. >> >> >> There is little humility in comp. I see it as an ideology which feigns >> politeness but actually buries consciousness alive. >> >> >> Rhetoric. >> >> You can answer this, but in my reply, I will just say if I see or not an >> argument. >> >> >> Can sense not be allowed to represent itself in your court of argument? >> >> >> How about: can't you see this isn't going anywhere? Bruno is repeating >> himself, while you enjoy, as the only one here, your own rhetoric >> variations, repeating the same content and biases over and over in >> linguistic strings, with only minor differences in use of metaphor and >> empty, albeit sometimes amusing expressions and figures of speech, that >> don't constitute a serious argument or proposal of ontology framing your >> ideas on "sense". >> > > Being the only one here doesn't bother me (even if it did, there are > others not on this list who understand my ideas), and I don't care that > what I'm saying doesn't fulfill your expectations of 'going anywhere'. As > long as others can see the conversations, they can judge who is putting > together a new idea of consciousness, physics, and information, and who is > resisting it based on bias. The conversation is a commercial for the ideas > being discussed even if one side does not recapitulate to the other. > > >> Your zeal in seeking validation from Bruno by presenting yourself "as his >> equal confronting him", mirrors perhaps the doubt you have concerning your >> own thoughts, which is good indication of your intention to seek and test, >> because why else would you seek this validation? >> > > I'm not seeking validation, I'm seeking an awakening to a new idea - > either for Bruno or someone else. > > >> >> Then again, we are all each other's equals, so why force this with >> monster discussions of details of details, when we know the outcome: >> > > Discussing the details yields new examples, new connections, etc. > > >> you will not consider comp as possibility or example and improvise >> linguistic tricks for the problems that come up in the edifice of your work >> on logical and mathematical levels, by putting aesthetics on a pedestal, >> which is also unconvincing as of today. >> > > If you put logical and mathematical levels on a pedestal, then the > aesthetic is undervalued proportionately. Your bias is exactly what my view > predicts. > > >> >> Instead of taking the problems, criticisms arising here as some personal >> thing, take what you can learn or leave it; your work needs to overcome its >> limits and problems, and you won't get it done by forcing anybody here, >> including Bruno, to spoon feed you. >> > > How am I forcing Bruno to do anything, much less spoon feed me? > Simple: by abusing cordiality, professionalism, distance, and politeness that you would never reciprocate because people here other than yours truly, especially Bruno, take your ideas at face value; even when you trample views that are not your own as "nonsense", instead of taking more distanced, professional perspective. Take it easy, man... because nobody has or should have infinite credit and you will increasingly look like spam/nuisance if you keep it up; and people will increasingly switch off or ignore you; quite contrary to your intentions of awakening new ideas. Especially if you continue this obvious falsity of dismissing possible worldviews outright with linguistic play of unconvincing arguments and evidence. The fact that you need to state "my ideas are appreciated elsewhere" reflects a defensiveness, rather than an awakening. > I'm not looking for input from Bruno, > Then stop addressing him in this fashion, perhaps? > I'm looking to explain why comp ultimately fails and how it can be > inverted to find a new solution that makes more sense. > This, even if you succeeded, would still make "sense" ultimately dependent and determined by comp. But I don't have Bruno's patience and refuse, right here and now to be drawn into a discussion with you for similar reason: you've abused my openness to your ideas before and drawn me into redundant cockfight whack-a-mole style, because your attempt at non-comp theory has no convincing limits in assumptions. To further keep insisting is just bad form and style, even for an "awakening" ;-) I too will remain silent unless these problems are somehow addressed; and you can answer now of course, with your usual slick linguistic inversion. It will not compensate for failing to address these and similar issues your approach has, which many, not just Bruno, have pointed out repeatedly at this point. PGC > > >> >> Craig >> >> <blockquote class="gmail_quote" s >> >> ... > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Everything List" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/everything-list. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
